"And I beheld, and heard the voice of one eagle flying through the midst of heaven, saying with a loud voice: Woe, woe, woe to the inhabitants of the earth....[Apocalypse (Revelation) 8:13]

Tuesday, May 29, 2018

FALSE TRAD HERETIC SISCOE VS. FR CHAZAL

FALSE TRAD HERETIC SISCOE VS. FR CHAZAL

DR. CHOJNOWSKI

Here below is an exchange between Robert Siscoe and Fr. Francois Chazal
over the question of what has been happening over the course of the last
60 years. From what we read, Mr. Siscoe acts as if the last 110 YEARS
HAVE NOT HAPPENED. As if we are in the days of St. Pius X when we could
merely say that the institutional Church was being infiltrated by hidden
evil men. Such an analysis ---- along with allowing the Catholic Church
to be filled with public apostates and heretics, totally ignores the
fact that for almost 60 years we have had an endless stream of
"official" deviations from the infallible and ancient faith of the
Apostles and from (for example, with the new rite of episcopal
consecration) even what had been definitively decreed only decades
before by Pope Pius XII.

How many times do I need to put up the video of Archbishop Lefebvre
saying that "Rome is in Apostasy"? How can the Church of Christ be the
Pure Bride of Christ if MOST ALL of Her members adhere to heresy and
non-Catholic or anti-Catholic rites and practices and laws?

It would be interesting to ask Mr. Robert Siscoe the question, "Which
are the parts of the institutional "Church" that are not corrupted in some way?"
But the Church cannot be corrupted AT ALL, at least in Her teachings,
practices, canon laws, canonizations, and universal magisterium. If She
could be, who can tell us which parts are pure and which parts are not?
Siscoe and Salza? This is rank Protestantism or Gallicanism.

Here is the exchange between Siscoe and Fr. Chazal:

Dear Father,

I had to leave town again for another business trip, and only recently
returned. I’m sure it’s too late to add any quotations to your book,
but I thought I would send them anyway (will send in another e-mail).
Below are my replies to the points of disagreement you mentioned in the
previous e-mail. I’m not sure how much of an actual disagreement there
is. I guess we will find out when you read my replies.

Fr. Chazal : Yet I fear our disputations with sedevacantists are going to be all the more endless if:

1.We deny the emergence of a Newchurch. SVs go too far, et Novus Ordo
est "Coetus disgregatus, nova doctrina, novis sacramentis sub nova
notione auctoritatis". We cannot say that this newchurch is fully
realised like the SV claim, but we cannot deny it is really emerging
heterogeneously. P.59 you are afraid of us saying the Catholic Church is
a new church, when in reality we can say that within the Official
Church, growing parts are morphing into this cancerous newchuch. The
crucial mistake of Bishop Fellay is to confuse the hijacked official
church with the Catholic Church.

Reply: How to explain the situation in the Church today is difficult.
Some have gone so far as to compare it to a mystery, but if we consider
it in light of the traditional doctrine of the Church, I believe we can
arrive at some certain conclusions. Let’s consider the two solutions
proposed to explain the crisis.

Solution #1: One explanation is that the visible,
institutional Church has become an entirely New Church – a false Church
that one can have nothing to do with. Some maintain that the entire
hierarchy of this New Church is false, as is the Pope. Others (Bishop
Tissier) hold that the hierarchy is partly Catholic and partly not, and
that the Pope is the head of two different Churches at the same time –
the New Church and the Catholic Church.

Solution # 2: The second solution is that the visible,
institutional Church has been infiltrated by her enemies (Freemasons,
Communists and Satanists, etc.), who are destroying her from within, but
who have not completely done so. The visible institution itself
remains the true Church, but it has been reduced to a state in which it
is virtually unrecognizable, but without any of God’s promises being
violated. Just as Christ – the Head of the Church – permitted His
enemies to seize Him, torture him and reduce him to a condition in which
He was all but unrecognizable, so too has God permitted His enemies to
do the same to the Church – at least nearly all of the Western Rite.

Reply to Solution #1:

It is not possible to hold that the visible institution of the Church
has become an entirely New Church. That would certainly be incompatible
with the Promise that the gates of hell shall not prevail, for as
Cardinal Billot and many others teach, “visible Church is the Church to which his promises pertain; promises, namely, that she would be perennial and indefectible…” If
the visible entity – with its hierarchy and membership - had defected
by morphing into a New Church, whether gradually or at once, the Promise
of Christ would have been violated. For this reason, the teaching
of Fr. Kramer that the “visible entity will apostatize” is extremely
problematic, if not heretical. For just as one cannot separate the infallible Church from the true Church, or the indefectible Church from the true Church, neither can one separate the visible Church from the true Church. Just as the infallible and indefectible Church is visible, so to the visible Church (the “visible entity”) is both infallible and indefectible.

I would also note that the visible Church must remain numerically one
and the same visible society as that which existed during the days of
the Apostles. Although the members of the society die and are replaced
by others, but the moral body remains one, and it is certain that the moral body of the Church today is numerically one with the Church before the Council.

If we maintain that the visible, institutional Church of today is a New
Church, we are forced to reject the indefectibility of the Church as it
has always been explained, and end with many other difficulties
(especially concerning the mark of apostolicity).

Solution #2: Saying the Pope is simultaneously the head of the true
Church and a false Church is equally problematic, since the membership
and hierarchy of the “two Churches” are one and the same visible society.

It is clear to me that the correct way to understand the crisis is in
solution #2 – namely, that the true Church has been infiltrated by her
enemies and is undergoing a Passion similar to what Christ Himself
endured. Our Lord is permitting His enemies to do all they can get away
with, without destroying the institution and without any of His
Promises being violated. The good he will bring out of this is the
glorification of his Mother, who will crush His enemies and bring about a
miraculous restoration of the “visible entity”, with its hierarchy and
membership, that will a marvel to behold and usher in an era of peace.

Fr. Chazal: 2. We are uncomfortable with separating with the new church
(p.312). Those who separated with Nestorius did not start a parallel
Patriarchate like the SV would have done. They saw the crime, took
distance, raised the alarm and obtained Nestorius to be taken down just
as we hope Pope Francis will be taken down. SV give up the idea of
taking them down because they don't "take them up". Nemo dat quod non
habet, nemo aufert quod non adest. What we say to Francis is just that:
"You are a disgrace to your office, you will be taken down." It happens
all the time in civilian life.

Reply: In our chapter of Recognize and Resist, we make a distinction
between a formal and material separation (p. 634-5). A formal
separation would be a public rejection of the Pope, as such, and the
entire Church in union with him. A material separation would entail
avoiding the infectious modernism within the Church, and, to the extent
possible, not paying attention to the Pope. It would certainly seem
that a material separation from Pope Francis is justified by the natural
law, which gives us a right to defend ourselves (physically and
spiritually). Just as a wife can materially separate from an abusive
husband without having to divorcing him (formal separation), so likewise
a material separation from the spiritual danger of a bad Pope seems
entirely justified.

Regarding the case of Nestorius, I will provide some quotations below
from the letters of St. Cyril and Pope Celestine which were written at
the time. One point is that Cyril asked the Pope if it was permitted
for him to cut off communion with Nestorius. Cyril refused to do so
without the pope giving his judgment on the matter. Interestingly, even
though Nestorius had remained hardened in heresy following two warnings
given him by St. Cyril, the Pope said not to cut of communion with him
yet, but instead only to warn him that if he persisted, he would be cut
off from the Church. In another letter, the pope told the faithful in
Constantinople to reject Nestorius’ teaching, while clearly indicating
that he had not yet been cut off as “the ruler of Israel” (the Church),
which, he said, would only occur if Nestorius persisted.

Fr. Chazal: 3 We fail to specify that the N.O. jurisdiction is impounded
(not suppressed), "vi haeresi" (p.68). If a heretical bishop awaits the
judicial declaration of his crime, it is unwise to heed to his guidance
unless we are ignorant of what he is doing, like the vast majority of
Filipinos here.

Reply: I would make three distinctions: 1) The possession of authority by the prelate. 2) The moral obligation to avoid the prelate (if he is endangering one’s faith by preaching errors and heresy). 3) The legal obligation to avoid a heretical bishop.

Concerning the possession of jurisdiction, if a bishop is legally
appointed to an office to which jurisdiction is attached he acquires the
jurisdiction connected to the office. Even if there were a legal
defect that prevented him from obtaining the office - either on the part
of the one appointing or the one receiving - the Titulus Coloratus (color of title), combined with common error, would suffice to render all of his acts of jurisdiction valid, per se (either by virtue of habitual or supplied jurisdiction).
All that is required for his acts of jurisdiction to remain valid is
that he appears to have been legally appointed, and is considered quoad nos to hold office.

Concerning jurisdiction being impounded, by which I think you mean unable to exercise acts of jurisdiction, I would make several distinctions.

If the act in question did not involve imposing a moral obligation on
his subjects, but instead involved appointing someone to an office, or
approving a religious order, etc., it would seem to me that even public
heresy would in no impound the act.

However, if it involved an act of teaching or commanding his subjects,
it would seem that a heretic’s jurisdiction could be impounded in one of
two ways: either morally, due to the natural right of the subject to protect himself by not listening to his to his teachings, or by refusing to obey an illicit command (which would equally apply to a non-heretic superior), or legally, which would occur if the subject was legally obliged to avoid him.

In these cases, the exercise of jurisdiction (not his jurisdiction, as such) would be impounded, due to the fact that the subject’s obligation to listen or obey would not bind him in conscience.

The legal obligation to avoid a heretic is what John of St. Thomas refers to when he says a heretical pope who has been legally declared vitandusis unable to influence the Church. The legal obligation results from the vitandus declaration, which commands the
faithful to avoid him. Based on divine law (Titus 3:10), the Church
has the right to command that a heretic who has remained hardened in
heresy after two warnings must be avoided. Since the faithful are
obliged to obey the licit commands of the Church, if the Church declares
a pope vidandus (which it has a right to do), it creates a situation in
which he is unable to govern the Church, as a result of the moral obligation imposed on the faithful to avoid him. The effect is that his exercise of jurisdiction is rendered entirely impotent – and legally so.

John of St. Thomas says the vindandus declaration induces a disposition
into the person of the pope that renders him incapable sustaining the
pontificate. Christ then acts by authoritatively punishing the pope by
deposing him.

Fr. Chazal 4: What emanates from the Novus Ordo is much more than
imprudent acts or practices that don't contradict the Faith directly
(p.469-472), but thousand coordinated little cuts that kill just as
surely as a battleaxe facial blow. I could concede [very hard, but I' ll
try] the cuts are small, but they are not uncoordinated, they don t
come in an isolated and innocuous way... millions got deceived, misled
away from eternal salvation. The back hand indirect blow sure did the
kill. Give the Devil his due, He is the indirect dude.

Reply: And this shows us why it is morally justified to entirely avoid
the Novus Ordo parishes. And since Vatican II also causes a bunch of
“little cuts” due to its misleading and ambiguous teachings, it too should be avoided.
That being said, I believe it is going too far to say solid priests who
are in normal union with Rome must also be avoided. I know some
priests who, believe it or not, are extremely solid who were recently
granted permission to found a completely Traditional order by the local
bishop. Time will tell how long it lasts, but so far things are going
well and the fruits are exceptional. So, I would disagree that priests
such as these must be avoided simply because they are approved. (I
realize you didn’t say that, but I thought I would mention it).

I would be very interested in your thoughts on what I’ve written, if you have any. I’ll send the quotations in another e-mail.

TRADCATKNIGHT VIDEOS!

TCK Youtube Channel

TRADCATKNIGHT- TOP 3 CATHOLIC YOUTUBE CHANNEL

Archbishop Lefebvre

“This Second Vatican Council Reform, since it has issued from Liberalism and from Modernism, is entirely corrupt; it comes from heresy and results in heresy, even if all its acts are not formally heretical. It is thus impossible for any faithful Catholic who is aware of these things to adopt this Reform, or to submit to it in any way at all. To ensure our salvation, the only attitude of fidelity to the Church and to Catholic doctrine, is a categorical refusal to accept the Reform.”

ANNOUNCEMENTS

Archbishop Lefebvre

“And we have the precise conviction that this new rite of Mass expresses a new faith, a faith which is not ours, a faith which is not the Catholic Faith. This New Mass is a symbol, is an expression, is an image of a new faith, of a Modernist faith. ….Now it is evident that the new rite, if I may say so, supposes another conception of the Catholic religion-another religion.”

FOLLOW TRADCATKNIGHT ON TUMBLR!

TCK Facebook

FOLLOW TRADCATKNIGHT ON PINTEREST

Archbishop Lefebvre

That Conciliar Church is a schismatic Church, because it breaks with the Catholic Church that has always been. It has its new dogmas, its new priesthood, its new institutions, its new worship, all already condemned by the Church in many a document, official and definitive.... The Church that affirms such errors is at once schismatic and heretical. This Conciliar Church is, therefore, not Catholic. To whatever extent Pope, Bishops, priests, or faithful adhere to this new Church, they separate themselves from the Catholic Church...

Fr. Hesse Summary on Vatican II

Vatican II = Heretical & Schismatic

Exposing Vatican II & New Mass, Fr. Villa

Archbishop Lefebvre

“Well, we are not of this religion. We do not accept this new religion. We are of the religion of all time; we are of the Catholic religion. We are not of this 'universal religion' as they call it today-this is not the Catholic religion any more. We are not of this Liberal, Modernist religion which has its own worship, its own priests, its own faith, its own catechisms, its own Bible, the 'ecumenical Bible'-these things we do not accept."

Traditional Quotes & Prayers

The Real 3rd Secret of Fatima

Inlcudes Vatican II and the soon Apostate Church..."...because Fatima is a very apocalyptic message. It says that no matter what happens there are going to be terrible wars, there are going to be diseases, whole nations are going to be wiped out, there are going to be 3 days darkness, there are going to be epidemics that will wipe out whole nations overnight, parts of the earth will be washed away at sea and violent tornadoes and storms. It's not a nice message at all." Fr Malachi Martin

SSPX Marian Corps Donations

Marian Corps-Australasia

Fr. Chazal

Fr. Girouard

Or send a cheque made out to Fr. Patrick Girouard at : P.O.Box 1543, Aldergrove, BC, V4W 2V1, Canada.

St. Marcel Initiative

Or, if you prefer, in the U.S., make your contribution by telephone, toll free: 855-4-S. Marcel (855.476.2723), or internationally, by sending your donation directly to donations@stmarcelinitiative.com via PayPal.

TCK TESTIMONIALS

Eric Gajewski, Founder of DefeatModernism(formerly known as Defeat the Heresies)

Resistance Forum

True Traditionalist Forum

Pope XII: “Suicide Of Altering the Faith In Her Liturgy…..”

"I am worried by the Blessed Virgin's messages to Lucy of Fatima. This persistence of Mary about the dangers which menace the Church is a divine warning against the suicide of altering the Faith, in Her liturgy, Her theology and Her soul. … I hear all around me innovators who wish to dismantle the Sacred Chapel, destroy the universal flame of the Church, reject Her ornaments and make Her feel remorse for Her historical past."A day will come when the civilized world will deny its God, when the Church will doubt as Peter doubted. She will be tempted to believe that man has become God. In our churches, Christians will search in vain for the red lamp where God awaits them. Like Mary Magdalene, weeping before the empty tomb, they will ask, 'Where have they taken Him?'"

ALEXA RANK

Find The Rank Of Any Website

Current Crusaders Online Worldwide (RealTime)

St. Bernard:

Go forth confidently then, you knights, and repel the foes of the cross of Christ with a stalwart heart. Know that neither death nor life can separate you from the love of God which is in Jesus Christ, and in every peril repeat, "Whether we live or whether we die, we are the Lord's." What a glory to return in victory from such a battle! How blessed to die there as a martyr! Rejoice, brave athlete, if you live and conquer in the Lord; but glory and exult even more if you die and join your Lord. Life indeed is a fruitful thing and victory is glorious, but a holy death is more important than either. If they are blessed who die in the Lord, how much more are they who die for the Lord!

How secure, I say, is life when death is anticipated without fear; or rather when it is desired with feeling and embraced with reverence! How holy and secure this knighthood and how entirely free of the double risk run by those men who fight not for Christ! Whenever you go forth, O worldly warrior, you must fear lest the bodily death of your foe should mean your own spiritual death, or lest perhaps your body and soul together should be slain by him.

Indeed, danger or victory for a Christian depends on the dispositions of his heart and not on the fortunes of war. If he fights for a good reason, the issue of his fight can never be evil; and likewise the results can never be considered good if the reason were evil and the intentions perverse. If you happen to be killed while you are seeking only to kill another, you die a murderer. If you succeed, and by your will to overcome and to conquer you perchance kill a man, you live a murderer. Now it will not do to be a murderer, living or dead, victorious or vanquished. What an unhappy victory--to have conquered a man while yielding to vice, and to indulge in an empty glory at his fall when wrath and pride have gotten the better of you!

But what of those who kill neither in the heat of revenge nor in the swelling of pride, but simply in order to save themselves? Even this sort of victory I would not call good, since bodily death is really a lesser evil than spiritual death. The soul need not die when the body does. No, it is the soul which sins that shall die.

The knight of Christ, I say, may strike with confidence and die yet more confidently, for he serves Christ when he strikes, and serves himself when he falls. Neither does he bear the sword in vain, for he is God's minister, for the punishment of evildoers and for the praise of the good. If he kills an evildoer, he is not a mankiller, but, if I may so put it, a killer of evil. He is evidently the avenger of Christ towards evildoers and he is rightly considered a defender of Christians. Should he be killed himself, we know that he has not perished, but has come safely into port.

Once he finds himself in the thick of battle, this knight sets aside his previous gentleness, as if to say, "Do I not hate those who hate you, O Lord; am I not disgusted with your enemies?" These men at once fall violently upon the foe, regarding them as so many sheep. No matter how outnumbered they are, they never regard these as fierce barbarians or as awe-inspiring hordes. Nor do they presume on their own strength, but trust in the Lord of armies to grant them the victory.

.

.

Saint Athanasius

"May God console you! ... What saddens you ... is the fact that others have occupied the churches by violence, while during this time you are on the outside. It is a fact that they have the premises – but you have the Apostolic Faith. They can occupy our churches, but they are outside the true Faith. You remain outside the places of worship, but the Faith dwells within you. Let us consider: what is more important, the place or the Faith?The true Faith, obviously. Who has lost and who has won in the struggle – the one who keeps the premises or the one who keeps the Faith? True, the premises are good when the Apostolic Faith is preached there; they are holy if everything takes place there in a holy way ..."You are the ones who are happy; you who remain within the Church by your Faith, who hold firmly to the foundations of the Faith which has come down to you from Apostolic Tradition. And if an execrable jealousy has tried to shake it on a number of occasions, it has not succeeded. They are the ones who have broken away from it in the present crisis. No one, ever, will prevail against your Faith, beloved Brothers. And we believe that God will give us our churches back some day. "Thus, the more violently they try to occupy the places of worship, the more they separate themselves from the Church. They claim that they represent the Church; but in reality, they are the ones who are expelling themselves from it and going astray. Even if Catholics faithful to Tradition are reduced to a handful, they are the ones who are the true Church of Jesus Christ."